This is a split board - You can return to the Split List for other boards.

120 Hz with 3ms response or a 60 Hz with 2ms response?

#1Rip_Van_WinkleXPosted 8/25/2013 1:16:53 PM
What would be the difference? All I want is to see the pictures go more smooth even though my games don't go past 60 frames due to hardware limitation.
---
GamerTag: RipVanWinkleX
#2wizardmonPosted 8/25/2013 1:23:42 PM
No difference.
---
I think I'm the only person on gamefaqs with a daughterboard - ToastyOne
New with a moderation history more plentiful than karma. - Fossil (Moderator)
#3reincarnator07Posted 8/25/2013 1:24:29 PM
Response time is almost as meaningless as dynamic contrast ratio when comparing displays. Which 2 displays are you looking at?
---
Fan of metal? Don't mind covers? Check out my youtube and give me some feedback
http://www.youtube.com/sircaballero
#4DerPancakePosted 8/25/2013 1:24:39 PM
Very little difference. You probably won't even notice.
---
i7-4770k | EVGA GeForce GTX770 2GB | Asus Sabertooth Z87 | Corsair Vengeance 8GB RAM
Samsung 840 120GB SSD | CM Storm Enforcer | Corsair TX 750 Watt
#5ElDudorinoPosted 8/25/2013 1:27:51 PM
reincarnator07 posted...
Response time is almost as meaningless as dynamic contrast ratio when comparing displays. Which 2 displays are you looking at?


It's as Reincarnator says. It's not even just that 2ms is very similar to 3ms... it's that you have no way of knowing how those specs were measured and so the 2ms response time could actually be SLOWER than the 3ms time if it was measured using a more generous grayscale. Response time is a BS measurement and it generally doesn't matter because ghosting is largely a thing of the past anyway.
#6Rip_Van_WinkleX(Topic Creator)Posted 8/25/2013 1:36:12 PM
reincarnator07 posted...
Response time is almost as meaningless as dynamic contrast ratio when comparing displays. Which 2 displays are you looking at?


It was more of a question to find the general idea of the whole thing. I am just looking for cheap moniters for smoother gameplay. I know 120 Hz is not cheap, but if I wanted to see if maybe I should pay a bit more then normal for something like that.
---
GamerTag: RipVanWinkleX
#7ElDudorinoPosted 8/25/2013 1:44:13 PM
Refresh rate (120Hz vs 60Hz) for computer monitors is a HUGE selling point for a lot of people who can run their games at a consistent 120FPS. Everything is that much smoother, I guess. I've never seen it in action and I kinda doubt it would make a big difference for me but some people swear by it, so there you go. It's just Response Time that is basically BS due to the lack of standardization in measurement.

Also be sure not to mix up 120Hz computer monitors with 120Hz HDTVs, since "120Hz" for HDTVs is a lie.
#8TheWayOfTheGunPosted 8/25/2013 1:46:41 PM
Response time is really only significant when comparing different technologies like CRT vs LCD vs Plasma.

If you have some serious GPU power, get the 120Hz.
#9nIMr0D888Posted 8/25/2013 2:48:05 PM
I have been using 120hz for a few years now and I can honestly say that 60hz look jerky to me now.

On top of that at 60hz it takes 16.67ms per redraw and at 120hz (assuming you can maintain it) is only 8.3ms.
---
CAUTION: EXTREMELY HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCE
#10DarkZV2BetaPosted 8/25/2013 6:37:07 PM
8+x+(~3?) vs 16+x+(~2?)

Assuming those were actual uniform across-the-board response times.
---
Want that Shield!
Ball and Cup on ps mobile has framerate issues. -stargazer64